Hardware platform overview mt-daapd

As I recently found a new option for a nice hardware platform, which I have been looking into, so I would like to give a short overview over the currently recommendable hardware platforms for running mt-daapd. There isnt much comprehensive on the forum yet about this so I thought I make a start.
Feel free to expand it and give comments.

---

In general mt-daapd can be run on most unix or x86 based hardware, provided one finds a way to compile software for it. There are binaries for most unixes and also for x86, so one will in some cases get around compiling it onself, but obviously the platform must offer a way to compile for it as someone has to do it at least once. Also the hardware must allow for new software to be installed or it must be hackable.
Here are the options I am so far aware of together with a few pros/cons:

1) Normal computer: (varying price range > 300 EUR)
Whether linux or Windows, there are binaries for it and it works. Once the OS is on it it should be pretty straightforward and easy to get mt-daapd running. Any x86 computer that is nowadays available, even a 5 year old one, has more than sufficient power to run even larger collections of music, so thats also good.
Unfortunately there is a rather big disadvantage also – the computer has to be running or you need to always fire it up before listening to music. That is either very inconvenient or it means burning a lot of energy for nothing, which ends up a very bad deal as your electricity bill goes up quite a bit. Unfortunately normal desktops aint really good at conserving energy. And they also usually arent really very silent.

Typical energy use: around 60W idle and easily >100W active

2) The NSLU (ca. 65 EUR):
This is perhaps the most commonly used platform for running mt-daapd. It is also the cheapest option with currently around 65 EUR hardware (harddrive excluded) and an energy consumption of <10W for the NSLU. There is a huge community for it and thus almost all problems that can turn up are documented and solved. Installation requires a reflash with the hacked unslung formware. For computer inapt people that can be a burden but it is rather fast and easy for people with computer experience. This would be currently the recommended platform if you want to run just mt-daapd with a normal large music collection and nothing else

Typical energy: around 10W with a 2.5” disk and a bit over 20W with a 3.5” disk.

3) Synology (200+ EUR better versions):
Synology offers a range of network storage units that come with a nice range of preinstalled softwares and functions, which is its main advantage. mt-daapd is unfortunately not installed but the units are hacked and there are threads about it also in this forum. Generally you can split it up in the “pre 107+” units, which are not much faster than a NSLU and the 107+ or higher which are faster, but also significantly more expensive (200+ EUR). The older units are well hacked and it should be easy to get mt-daapd on em. For the 107+ units things can be a bit more tricky as the compiler environment for these is rather new yet, but it shoud also be possible.
Biggest disadvantage is that hardware-wise these units are overpriced nowadays. Compare to 1) and 4) resp. 5).

Energy: no idea, likely not much higher than a NSLU solution

4) Buffalo Linkstation Pro 250 GB (thanks pmorris):
Priced around 150 EUR for the 250 Gb version (thus including HD) it is about the league that 3) offers. Slightly less CPU power same 128MB ram means it shouldnt differ too much, albeit for a much more reasonable pricing.

“It’s easily hacked. It performs much better than the NSLU2. Consumes about 17w of power (which includes the disk drive) and is available for under US $200 for a 250gb version, but also has 320GB, 500GB, 750GB & 1TB versions. It supports gigabit ethernet and is very stable.”

Energy: no idea, likely not much over a NSLU

5) Mini-ITX computers (200+ EUR):
This is the relatively “new” (well for mt-daapd) platform I recently stumbled over. Mini-ITX is a much smaller motherboard standard than ATX (normal computers) and thus it is often used for thin clients. But it should also give an excellent “fat” mt-daapd server. One should use a board with a passively cooled Via CPU, as those are low in energy consumption. With the right compounds such a computer shouldnt need more energy than a NSLU albeit for a lot more CPU/RAM power. The Mini-ITX standard and computers are around for a while already, but its recently through some price drops that they get interesting. I saw a barebone (thats motherboard, CPU, power and casing ready assembled) for 185 EUR and 1 GB ram is also cheap (20 bucks). So for pretty little money one can built a low-energy system with a lot better performance than a NSLU. This should mainly be intersting for those who want to do more than just run mt-daapd. E.g. for http servers with php/sql and/or video streaming, which the NSLU aint ideal for due to low memory/CPU. I will explore this further.
Main disadvantage is of course you need to install your own operating system and then mt-daapd. Nowadays installing a good distri isnt a big hassle any more but it costs some time and you should have heard the word “linux” already.
One can by the way save around 50 EUR by choosing Intels new Essentials platform with a celeron 1.2GHz, as those boards are available from 60 EUR. These are even faster than the Via C7 1GHz, but they burn afaik around 10W more for the motherboard/CPU combo.

Energy consumption: 22W idle, 26W with HD action and 30W under full use CPU/HD.

=================

General hint: USE 2.5” laptop harddrives!
Until recently 2,5” laptop harddrives were either pricy or too small. Now that is fortunately changing. I saw a 250GB laptop harddrive for 84 EUR and that is certainly not the end of the development, so I would strongly recommend using 2.5” laptop harddrives for any 24/7 running system. These harddrives are using a lot less energy (a few Watts only, typical 2-6W) and are also less noisy. As an additional plus they are built to do a lot of spin-down/up cycles without defect. Note that most 3.5” desktop HDs have a problem there. If you have em spin down a lot you may experience an early failure as they are not built for this (typical MTBF spindowns 600k for 2.5” vs 40-60k for 3.5”). So using the energy saving options on a 3.5” HD is not without risks while it would be much needed there…